Murphy wrote:
* Is the Pineapple Partnership a player?
yes -> Quazie voted AGAINST, VI = 3/4, voters = 7
no -> Quazie voted FOR, VI = 4/3, voters = 7
indeterminate -> Quazie did not vote (condition in Rule 2127
paragraph 2 was not met), VI = 3/3, voters = 6
Since it's the subject of a CFJ that was not resolved when the voting
period ended, it could not be reasonably determined during the voting
period, and so I think it's reasonable to throw the vote out by R2127,
regardless of how the CFJ turns out. This might be a good precedent
to set.
-Goethe
